Patna High Court
Vinod ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted provisionally subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Vinod Chaudhary sought anticipatory bail after a FIR under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleged that 27 litres of liquor were recovered from a co‑accused’s house and 18 litres from his own residence, which he claims is joint family property and that no liquor was found in his conscious possession. He argued that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner surrender within six weeks, furnish a bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender bars the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property negates alleged possession by the petitioner.
- Whether the High Court can condition anticipatory bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31362 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2026 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Vinod Chaudhary S/O Late Ramchandra Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Bakhari Ward
no. 9, P.S.- Sursand, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 27 liters of liquor from house of Pramod and 18
liters of liquor from house of petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31362 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after amendment in the excise act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the
instance of local person, but then the name of the person who
disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sursand
P.S. Case No. 115 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31362 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.